upvote

points

by p-e-w8 days ago |
comments
upvoteby bluGill8 days ago|
next
[-]
> students are evaluated by teachers with more knowledge and experience than them

This starts to break down in college when the professors often at best only slightly ahead. (they have more knowledge and experience - but in a slightly different area and so it isn't relevant to the depth of whatever is under consideration) Grad school is about advancing the state of the art - if you don't know more than your professor you are doing it wrong.

reply
upvoteby JadeNB8 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> This starts to break down in college when the professors often at best only slightly ahead. (they have more knowledge and experience - but in a slightly different area and so it isn't relevant to the depth of whatever is under consideration)

I can't speak to the humanities, but this estimation is just not true at most universities in the sciences. (EDIT: As cycomanic emphasizes below (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48477683), the part of the original comment pertaining to graduate education is more reasonable. I am speaking here only of undergraduate education.)

reply
upvoteby cycomanic8 days ago|
parent|
[-]
It certainly is true in physics and engineering that a PhD student at least half way through their PhD should know more than there supervisor about their topic (and usually much earlier). Even a Masters thesis project student should understand the intricacies of their project better than their supervisor. I'm speaking as someone who has supervised a significant number of both PhD and Masters students.
reply
upvoteby camdenreslink8 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The original post said “in college”. It might be true for PhD candidates halfway through their program, but that’s like 0.5% of college students. The vast majority of students are leagues behind their instructors in domain knowledge.
reply
upvoteby bluGill8 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I wouldn't say leagues behind, but otherwise I think we are on the same page, though I guess I worded it wrong. It is common for a couple students in any class to know more than the instructor in some niche part of the field even though the instructor has much more knowledge overall.
reply
upvoteby JadeNB8 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yes, I intentionally left out the next part of the quote about graduate school, since that seems more accurate. I was disputing only the part that I took to be pertaining to undergraduate education. The full quote is:

> This starts to break down in college when the professors often at best only slightly ahead. (they have more knowledge and experience - but in a slightly different area and so it isn't relevant to the depth of whatever is under consideration) Grad school is about advancing the state of the art - if you don't know more than your professor you are doing it wrong.

reply
upvoteby cycomanic8 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Ah apologies, that's what I get for skim reading and kneejerk replying. I completely agree with you, undergrads are highly unlikely to know more about a subject than their professor (obviously there can always be exceptions).
reply
upvoteby teiferer8 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
A grad student is evaluated by how well they are capable of following scientific procedures, communicated their results and have a sufficiently broad knowledge foundation. All that can easily be verified by a professor in a related field since they are very experienced in all those things. They don't actually need to be experts in the specific narrow topic the student has become the world expert in.
reply
upvoteby aspenmartin8 days ago|
prev|
[-]
> Evaluating an intelligence is a task that generally requires at least an equally capable intelligence, if not one of greater capability.

How is this remotely true. You can have verifiable tasks that you can’t do. Where does this idea come from??

reply
upvoteby Jensson8 days ago|
parent|
[-]
> How is this remotely true. You can have verifiable tasks that you can’t do. Where does this idea come from??

That is what benchmarks and intelligence tests are, which are vulnerable to benchmaxing etc. You wont be able to do this by gut feel though, you can create a personal benchmark though.

But point was that personal judgement of intelligence requires high intelligence. Creating a benchmark doesn't require as much but is more vulnerable.

reply
upvoteby aspenmartin8 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Yet human judgement isn’t subject to side effects like fluency and persuasiveness? It’s like everyone in this thread dismisses benchmarks and then…describes a crappy benchmark.

Sure you can create a personal benchmark. Who will evaluate it, you? How many tasks will it have? How will you evaluate success? Will you know which model is which or will you be blind? Which one will you do first? Ah right, benchmarking.

Also, benchmaxxing isn’t possible when the benchmark and measurements come after the model is released, right?

reply